www.Scratchley.org : blog

In response to my post about my ‘pink-ish’ neck - JB commented:

“Although you have articulately argued the justification for slaughtering animals…colouring it any other way doesn’t change the fact that you are still choosing to take a life. Does choosing to take a life automatically make you a redneck? I am sure that there are many self-proclaimed rednecks out there that have never hunted, trapped, or fished a thing. So…I don’t think you have truly embraced the redneck mantra - but I wonder where the motivation comes from to kill things.

I’m sorry, but killing things is just never ok for me. Not when you consider where we live, what food is available to us (although don’t get me started on the unethical treatment of farm animals that are unlucky enough to be raised as food sources for us), and recognizing how delicate our eco-system is. The idea of driving into some animals natural habitat, loading a gun, and picking off creatures at random (because they are *so* overpopulated) is a little bit appalling to me.”

I thought I might respond to the comment. (I am a blogger after all - master of my own pulpit…)  I hear what you suggest about driving into natural habitat to randomly pick off animals. At it’s most basic - you’re right but we all rationalize things differently.

Firstly - I won’t argue that non-hunters should be hunters. Nor do I believe or would I argue that non-hunters are ‘wrong’ in their opinion.  I believe that it’s important to respect both viewpoints.  As individuals we are born with a moral compass and though our compasses may not align exactly, it may have a great deal to do with where we stand, not where morality lies.  For most of us however, I’m sure they’ll get us to the same general location in the end. I would only ask that a reader of this entry keep an open mind.

I also would ask readers not to paint all hunters with the same brush. Like any group - there are those who choose to play fast and loose, and those who choose to ‘use’ the system.  I only provide here my personal philosophy - and why I personally am comfortable with performing the act of a hunt.

The phrase ’slaughter’ in the comment causes me some discomfort as it’s use connotates disregard for the animal. Similarly the application of “take a life” - which most often is used to indicate the end of a human life.  The application of “take a life” here would also indicate that the chicken or deer in question exhibit similar ‘life’ characteristics to a human being.  It is unlikely that wild animals have hopes and dreams, and beyond filling their bellies - they never plan ahead.  While most wild animals are ‘life’ - few have ‘a life‘ to take (with the exeption of primates perhaps - which I could certainly not support the hunting of).

At it’s simplest - it is the cessation of life that causes issue here - the ‘killing’ of an animal for sport or food.  At the root of it - how can one ‘kill’ an animal. Why hunt and why kill - as if the two are exclusive elements.

The ability of a hunter to seek out, find, harvest, prepare and utilize game is far from a skill-less venture.  We must be mindful of habitat, understand the needs and numbers of game animals, understand our impact on that environment as it pertains to those animals, and use that knowlege to succeed at harvest. Along with the matter of sustenance, and learning the skills to provide for oneself (outside the trip to Sobey’s) is a matter of tradition.

One might suggest that the non-hunter, in many cases (not all of course) is routinely clueless about the environment they so strongly fight to protect.  Are you familiar with Spruce fens?  What is required to sustain a Lodgepole and lichen hillock?  Have you ever walked or tried to survive off of an ancient erg complex? Found, made or drank Labrador tea?  Could you find and use groundwater?  Treat a broken bone, 10 miles from a road or vehicle? Stave off hypothermia or starvation?

I don’t mean to belittle by way of those questions - rather to show that as one learns the ways of the animals he wishes to harvest, he gains a deeper appreciation and understanding of that environment.

We are as a society getting farther and farther from the ability to survive outside the comforts of home.  Without the 7-11 and Safeway, without power or running water - how long would you last?  Sure - it’s pretty unlikely that you’d have to endure for long - but what if?  It doesn’t take much to cripple a population dependent on technology - just ask those who perished during a power outage in 1965. (http://www.ceet.niu.edu/faculty/vanmeer/outage.htm)  Were you unable to find shelter, build fire, seek water, find food - in 10 days you would not be able to do so.  Again - it isn’t that it’s likely - it’s about building a relationship with the environment in which we live.

To that end, a single deer could provide meat (we are omnivores as a rule) for a family for a year.  The harvested animal (from a statistical view) represents another animal that would most certainly die over the winter.  Populations are carefully monitored and the ability to hunt any given species is based on the carrying capacities of any management unit (referring to a region distinct from others where populations are concentrated.)  That single deer can represent additional habitat for animals that are endangered or threatened as a result of reduced load on the system.

Historically - these balances have been maintained by periodic culls, first by the natives, later by settlers, and in more recent times, by those charged with evaluating and maintaining the balance of wild ecosystems (ie: CWD Culls in Saskatchewan and Alberta to prevent Chronic Wasting).  Hunting is a direct contributing factor to maintaining the balance of wildlife to habitat.

Therefore - hunting is a way to provide for oneself, become more involved with the relationship of man to his environment, and a way to retain the traditions of generations.  Along the way - he may just gain a deeper understanding of his place in the world, and learn skills that could conceivably ensure his survival in extreme situations.

And now to the question of “taking a life”.  Ortega y Gassett (wiki) said: “I do not hunt in order to kill. I kill in order to have hunted.” (Translated from: Prólogo a un Tratado de Montería (Preface to a Treatise on the Hunt [separately published as Meditations on the Hunt], created as preface to a book on the hunt by Count Ybes published 1944)

We as ethical hunters do not take the life of an animal merely as a trophy.  A kill is a killing.  There is no disputing that. But remember our place as humans.  We did not survive and evolve as herbivores. Wild animals are just as keen to take the life of a child, or your dog, or a farmers herd of cattle as a hunter looking to provide wild meat for his family.  Predation is predation and it goes up and down the food chain. Hunters are willing to take ownership of that relationship.  We not only recognize that an animal has been killed to satisfy our need to hunt (from wherever it stems) but ensure that the animal is used fully, that the resource is effectively managed, and that the population does not suffer as a result of our actions.  Wild animals are not a renewable resource.  They are a finite resource, and the population surpluses are made available to legal hunters.

We shouldn’t confuse wild animals with what we see on television.  Rabbits are not thumper, deer are not Bambi, and Bears are not Yogi.  But what about wild animals that befriend farmers, and farm dogs! If a wild animal through fluke or fate receives food and comfort - they’ll befriend anyone.  One might argue however, that the animal would no longer be wild.  Once a human bond is forged - there is another level of ‘life’ imposed.  I could no more harvest someones pet deer than a dog or horse.

Hunters with a focus on utilizing game as a food source are focused on two forms of game specifically - ‘big game’ and ‘game birds’.  Hunters with a passion for the ’sport’ of hunting generally focus on predator hunting.  When we talk about wild animals hunted as game like Deer, Elk, Moose or Antelope; game birds like Duck, Goose, Pheasant or Grouse;we are talking about a hunted food source.

In these cases, game hunters are consumers who wish to use natural, wild resources (talk about organic and free range…) and are willing to accept direct responsibility for their actions - full circle.  How can I justify eating a hamburger, but not support the killing of the cow?  How can I eat chicken wings - but contest the execution of the chicken?  Any true vegetarian is exempt on this one - because often they cannot accept the slaughter for food.  I respect that view too, and respect their conviction. Unless they wear leather shoes…

The harvest of an animal which would be consumed or used for food, for clothing, for protection is still a hunted animal.  Be it a squirrel harvested for use in materials to catch fish; A deer harvested to fill a belly, or a Coyote killed in order to protect livestock;  the end result is the same.  Along the way - our choices cause animals to be killed.  Leather shoes? Handbag? Coat? Leather seats in a car? Feather pillows? Glue to hold the spines of books together? Animals displaced from land and habitat to create farms to grow corn or wheat? What makes those acceptable?  That we were not holding the knife that bled the animals that these comforts were made from.  For one to truly find the death of a wild or farmed animal unacceptable - there is a difficult line to walk to avoid hypocrasy.

With respect to ’sport’ hunting, I cannot truthfully offer a complete opinion.  I have not had the opportunity, nor have I closely examined my feelings regarding hunting large predators like bear or cougar.  Where ‘varmints’ are concerned - Coyote, Gopher, or Rabbit - I’m not conflicted.  These are all reasonable game opportunities - based on application of some criteria: It’s not in my view acceptable to hunt a predator animal in an environment where it’s numbers or presence is not having a negative impact of the use of the land, or a negative impact on the population balance of a native population of animals.  In cases where the population is having a negative impact on the wildlife or land use - culling may certainly be justified.  As an example - Coyotes are wild animals whose numbers were once closely controlled by predators.  Those predators have been displaced, and their numbers reduced.  The fact that you now live in a house, on a paved road, with power and water guaranteed that.  The prey animals have become the new predators, and with little natural predation - are only growing in numbers as they move into our backyards.  This is why I see scat on my driveway - 20 feet from my sleeping son, and a fence apart from my 1600$ once wild west-highland terrier.

Would I hunt that animal?  Would I predate on that coyote - as it would on my dog or child? You betcha. Is there a difference between poisoning them and hunting them in this regard? None.  Many would suggest calling ‘animal control’ or calling on another agency to manage these problems.  In the city - a plan I wholeheartedly agree with.  On rural land,  the management of predators and pests is a valuable service to farmers and rural residents which happens to provide hunters the opportunity to practice and hone skills for use in harvest hunting opportunities to minimize suffering and maximize potential.

Is this a cut and dried topic? No. Of course not.  Everyone is passionate about their viewpoint.  I respect those who do not support hunting, and those who do not support sport hunting - but I also have comfort in the rationale that I use to calibrate my compass.  All I ask - as does any hunter - is that you respect our view and agree to disagree.  I’ll never drag a game animal into your yard, or show so much insensitivity as to force the topic down anyones throat. In the realm of managing our resources, and hunting game for the table, I get great excercise, see beautiful places, have learned much about the region I call home, and can say that I have taken part in the management of wildlife and ecology.  Those are footsteps that I hope create lasting opportunities for my son to see when he is older.

I’m was a little conflicted.  I grew up a ‘city’ kid. Wise in the ways of retail shopping, automobile shedding, and Hugo Boss - interspersed with good shoes and eating regularly at fast food joints while working at the ‘mall’.

20 years later, I’m an ardent fly-fisher who loves the outdoors, driving a Jeep - not a rice car, and have just completed hunter training and am a licenced hunter.

Today - as the snow fell, I looked outside and thought to myself ‘White tails will be hopping today.  Wonder if I should get a tag and fill our freezer for the year?’.

Next week I’m taking my CFSC (Canadian firearms safety course) to complete my hunter trifecta (Fish, Guns and Deer) and at some moment today - I actually thought I should check my neck for the red.

But am I really turning into a redneck?  Can someone hunt, fish and shoot - but still not be a redneck?  I say yes.

I’m concerned with the state of our wildlife.  I’m concerned about habitat changes, and I’m concerned with the quality of our flowing water.  I worry about the overpopulation of White tails, and the frequency with which people are being killed or injured on the roads as a result.

As a new hunter - I’m not from the old guard of ‘I’ve been shootin’ em since I wuz 5.’  I come from the newly educated, conservation focused camp.  I eat what I shoot or catch,  don’t shoot indiscriminantly, and enjoy seeing the critter get away when I miss.

Sure - I’ve got camoflaged stuff now.  Yes - I know how to load and ‘unload’ a 12 guage; and yes - I can field dress a grouse.   But these things are not red-neck… These are skills.

Hunters catch a bad ‘rep from the non-hunting and anti-hunting world.  We’re “gunning down helpless  animals” is something I’ve heard a few times now.  “Killing one of gods creatures - an innocent animal that has done nothing wrong…” and “unfairly using a gun instead of catching it with my hands.”   I can only reply that we are higher order life forms.  Spear or gun - it’s technology that the lower life forms don’t have.  Lucky man.

The ability to harvest and prepare your own food is a basic survival technique lost on most modern first world societies.  We have taken wild animals and made them pets, we’ve lost sight of our own backyard.  Ask any grade 6 student to describe the difference between a black bear and a grizzly bear - or the difference between a wolf and a coyote - and you’ll likely see stunned silence.  In spite of this - all 4 walk the streets of Whitecourt on occasion - and regularly in Fox Creek.  Understanding the nature of our world includes understanding it’s inhabitants and how they fit into the balance of things.

What many anti-hunting folks don’t understand is that while there is little sport to pointing a shotgun at a stationary target, there is less sport in allowing the surplus population of grouse or pheasant to waste over winter.   Wild populations are subject to the carrying capacity of a habitat - the raw number of animals that the territory can provide for.  Winter is the worst time for this capacity, and the numbers of animals early in the season and into the fall are almost always in excess of the capacity during lean winters.   Hunting thins the population (from the older end of the scale) and accounts for only a small percentage of the population losses.

These animals that we hunt are animals that have been traditionally hunted - for hundreds if not thousands of years.  Those anti-hunting christians who preach the ‘gods creatures’ argument for banning hunting forget that 100 years ago - their pastors would have been trapping and killing the same animals for feasts - and thanking god during grace for providing the bounty.

In that regard - I thank god - or my version of god - anyway.  I thank that animal; squirrel, grouse or trout. I thank my country - for valuing wildlife enough to ensure that I can partake in it’s management.

I think my neck is fine.

As a concerned Canadian citizen - and not a citizen of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, I strongly urge my American neighbors to get out and vote for John McCain.

As a CANADIAN - NOT AN AMERICAN I think it’s important to recognize how american policy affects the rest of the world, and we, who are not american need a US president who will make everyone else powerful and take away the rights, freedom, and prosperity from everyday AMERICAN citizens.  You don’t need change, hope, tax relief for the middle class (as you may recall that 24% of the cash in the US is in the pockets of less than 1% of the population) or that other swill (like reform, wage parity, effective health care, or a world stage that doesn’t wince every time the president eats seafood) Obama is offering, you need McCain and his amercian patriotism to spend your money abroad on weak military ventures to protect foreign oil for foreigners, and keep america in debt so that countries like Canada will prosper.  If you vote for McCain you’ll be making US stronger, and keeping yourselves out of touch in the new world economy which is JUST WHAT WE NEED.  A vote for MCCAIN is a vote for the everyone else! (who just happen to outnumber those who live in the US).   Just look at the Canadian dollar folks - a weak america is a strong Canada. Lets keep Canada strong, vote McCain.

Or - You can vote OBAMA and fix your country NOW.

(I mean - I think Palin is hot too - but she’s an idiot, with a narrow minded view of the world, and scares the shit out of me.)

So - it’s been a while.  While I sit here at the office waiting for a final build of our catalogue PDF’s from the team, I thought I might offer a few thoughts about the world at large, drop a few links to interesting things, and generally ensure that my blog is not as stale as the coffee I’m still drinking from lunch.

Since my last blog post the Canadian federal election has come and gone, and unsurprisingly there has been virtually no change in Canada’s political landscape, with the exception of moving around a few deck chairs.  The conservative minority government is still a minority, with an official opposition too weak to act decisively in a positive direction for Canada, and a leading party in too weak a position to drive real change.

The Harper government has held to many ‘conservativisms’ but has not crippled us or buried us in scandal yet however so I’ll bide my time before deciding on a real opinion.  There were a lot of us who saw the election as nothing more than an opportunity to hold an election called by the lowest bidder.  Harpers campaign of “You’re better off with Harper” rang dead-on.  No frontrunner emerged from ANY party to truly steal the stage and bring voters out of their cocoons.  In order for a real change I think a few things must change.

1.  Voting should become MANDATORY for all ‘new’ Canadians.  We must get these new members of our ‘Cultural Mosaic’ [ED. Note: @bgrier says I should use the phrase ‘Cultural Mozaic’ instead of my original ‘melting pot’ because the ‘pot is in the “US and A” Ok… ] out, educated in the issues, and at the polls.  No - I’m not done.  Voting should also be mandatory for all CITIZENS period.  It is NOT acceptable for less than 60% of eligible voters to share the responsibility for 100% of Canadians.  This is ludicrous.  Come on people - this is your COUNTRY.  Act like that means something.

2.  Through Election reform, we must enforce NATIONAL party criteria.  If you can’t run in every riding across this nation, you cannot effectively represent Canadians.  As a party, this only leads to divisive voting and a lack of cohesion.  Yes Monsieur Duceppe - this means you.  Quebec holds 75 of Canada’s 308 electoral ridings.  Quebec has a history of ‘a quest for distinction’ and it’s high time this country functioned as a Nation.  Either the Bloq runs nationally, or they turn their efforts into creating a Nation with a foundation of leadership and solidarity, by running under a national platform and leading the advancement of french culture through their elected representatives, rather than by stymieing the efforts of National parties to lead.

3. Election Reform to produce REAL candidates.  Low voter turnout is often (yes - I’m making a leap here) the result of a lack of charismatic candidates.  Candidates with passion and devotion to the country in which they live.  Candidates with a desire to impart REAL change to a system with real issues.  Candidates with the stones to stand up on the world stage and say THIS IS WHAT WE BELIEVE IN.   Before Elizabeth May got to stand before this nation she was an unknown, but after the debate public opinion the Blue bloods and the Red bloods seemed to show some notice of her.  Were she a member of a party without a history of granola eating vegans and Greenpeacers - she could have a real shot at influencing positive change for this country.

4. An END to Partisan Bullshit.  When was the last time you saw a Liberal suggest that a Conservative policy would work?  When was the last time Jack Layton said, you know “Mr. Duceppe - You’re right…”?  Why is it that everyone MUST take a viewpoint contrary to the person to their left and right? (Or just your right if we’re talking Green of course.)  It’s time our elected representatives went to work for the people, set a course based on sound economics and moral fundamentals, and got the job done.

I certainly hope for my country’s sake, and my child’s sake that our new(?) government can put down the campaign literature and set a course for the good over the next 4 years (18 months) and put a sound economic plan in place that takes environment, social responsibility and fiscal responsibility as foundations for the future.

Created by OnePlusYou - Free Online Dating

Of all the photos to get ‘dugg’ on ‘digg’ - it’s this one. Fun to get so many views in such a short period of time. Like getting slashdotted, but less stressful on my pysche.

read more | digg story

`Tis nay ever’ tide that ye be fortunate enough t’ sail th’ high seas, holdin’ th’ meek slave t’ yer whims. Today be international talk like a Pirate day.

Make ‘t count ye scurvy dog. Tell yer cap’n to walk the plank, and b’ sure to take stock of yer booty!

Everything is under control - so far.  I leave wednesday morning for a whirlwind trip of the Northeast US - leaving the family for a few days under the watchful eyes of Blane and KickbuttEdmonton.  She’s safe and sound with Ben - but me?  I’ll be in the company of two CRAZY CANUCKS hell bent on 100+ geocaches in the Northeast!

Our trip will take us through 12 states in the northeast, from Massachusetts to  Conneticut, and back through Pennsylvania, New York, Delaware, and looping back to the start / finish in Boston.  The route is insane, the cache list ridiculous, and a minivan our transport.

You can follow our travels at http://www.theehteamtour.com and if you’re Social Media Aware, we’ll be Twittering from the road…

Wish us luck!

If you’re one to enjoy a spirit from time to time, and even moreso if you’re a fly fisher, we’ve found nirvana.

DryFly distilling from Washington state has a wonderful product offering that you might want to check out. Offering limited bottlings of fine quality Gin, Vodka, and Whiskey the team at DryFly has landed walter.

The DryFly folks heard about our recent Mountain conclave (CanFF, FF@, NLFTF) and we gladly teamed up for some swag.  The gin and vodka are wonderful, and (though I didn’t personally sample it as they were out of their most recent bottling) I have it on good word that the whiskey is a solid one.  I’m a single malt guy myself - so I’ll hang tight on this - the extra “E” in Whiskey does make a difference you know?

Lovely stuff folks. If you have the chance - give them a try!

www.dryflydistilling.com

So I see (if you’re a cacher) you’re trying to find your way through “Detention”. Let me tell you this - if you are seeing this as a result of trying to find an URL to get you to the next step - it won’t work.

I don’t say that because I don’t think you could hack your way in if you needed to - but I say it because the solution is far simpler than that. Really - all the search strings and URL manipulation in the world won’t get you any closer. Truly - honestly - seriously… I didn’t do anything that my mom couldn’t figure out (no offense mom!).

For those of you who are NOT cachers, and wonder what the HELL I’m talking about - see this Puzzle Geocache. (Please note - it’s a cache released to premium subscribers only - so you may not be able to view the details.)

Really folks - while “/ducky.php” amused me - it’s so in the wrong direction. As was… /detention/GC1EPZV.php//code

Now I know why VP does these nasty puzzlers. It’s fun to watch the hoop jumpin.

EDIT: I hope I didn’t offend anyone by any of that - I just got a little frightened by the amount of unusal URL access to the blog, that my host might just smack me for. The answer is but a click away from the cache page… 1.04% of the time.